By Lucy Caulkett-
Caroline Flack’s family have been given an apology by the Metropolitan Police for not keeping a record about why it charged her with assault.
The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) carried out a review after complaints from the late television presenter’s mother about the Met’s handling of the case.
The review “did not identify any misconduct” in the Met’s decision.
Ms Flack(pictured) took her own life in February 2020 while facing prosecution over an alleged assault on her boyfriend.
Following the incident involving Flack and her boyfriend Lewis Burton in December 2019, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) recommended that the star should receive a caution. However, the Met Police appealed this, and she was instead charged with assault by beating.
The 40-year-old was known for her roles as a television presenter on Love Island, the Xtra Factor and winning Strictly Come Dancing in 2014.
She was due to appear in court over the alleged assault of her then-boyfriend Lewis Burton in the weeks before her death in 2020.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had recommended she receive only a caution.
However, London’s Met Police appealed against the CPS decision which resulted in her facing a charge of assault by beating.
An inquest later gave a conclusion of suicide after hearing how Ms Flack’s mental health had deteriorated following her arrest.
Her mother Christine Flack complained about the decision to charge her, claiming her daughter had been treated differently because of her fame , a claim objected to by a senior police officer told the inquest there was no bias involved.
A spokesperson for the Met Police said the force was ordered to apologise to Flack’s family following a review by the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), which found there was not a “record of rationale” to appeal against the CPS decision.
“We have done so and acknowledged the impact that this has had on them,” the Met spokesperson said. “Our thoughts and sympathies remain with Ms Flack’s family for their loss.”
After an initial investigation by the force’s Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) found there was no misconduct, Flack’s family escalated their concerns to the IOPC – and the Met was ordered to reinvestigate complaints relating to the process involved in appealing against the CPS decision.
This investigation concluded in May 2022, with the DPS finding again that the service provided was acceptable – although the force did identify “some learning around using IT systems to record appeal decisions and the use of decision models for cautions, which are being implemented”.
In June 2022, the IOPC received another application to review the force’s reinvestigation.An IOPC spokesperson said that following “a thorough assessment of this case” the review had been partially upheld. While it did not identify any misconduct, it concluded that one officer should receive “reflective practice”.
“We determined there were individual and organisational failings by the MPS (Metropolitan Police Service), therefore the service provided did not reach the standard a reasonable person could expect in relation to some aspects of the reinvestigation,” the spokesperson said.
“This is because the officer involved did not record their rationale for appealing the original CPS decision to take no further action and the force, at that time, had no system in place to record rationales in these circumstances.
“We have concluded the officer involved should be subject to the reflective practice review process. We have also asked the MPS to apologise to the complainant in relation to the rationale recording, and the absence of a system to record such rationales.”
Following the apology from the Met Police, Ms Flack’s mother told her local press, the Eastern Daily Press: “They have apologised for how they handled my complaint – but what they really should be apologising for is the way Carrie was treated.”
The Eastern Daily Press also reported the Met’s Chief Superintendent Andy Carter had told her that several measures that have been brought in to improve how officers go about appealing CPS decisions.